I don't even consider highways and collecting taxes socialist, or socialist'esque. But then again that brings us back to, what does socialism mean. It's as nebulous as fascism. Nobody can agree with one definition. I don't consider Nazi Germany as a fascist regime. But that's just me.
One of the classical definitions of socialism is the state control or ownership of means of production. But I feel that is a bit incomplete. The second half of that equation requires we discuss why the state should own any means of production. To re-distribute wealth, or equality. Because then we'll label anything govt. as being socialism.
Taxes collected to fund the military. Not socialism. Taxes collected to redistribute as welfare. Perhaps. That doesn't make our country socialist, however. Therefore,I don't consider highways or any other govt. program as socialist unless the aim is to equalize, redistribute, etc. Highways were created mainly for national defense reasons. Economic reasons as well.
Infrastructure is never socialist, in my opinion.
But I agree 100%. That's why Thomas Jefferson advocated for a little public rebellion once in a while. Like the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements. Of course Jefferson advocated fora little bloodshed, but then again he always did. Even back then, the public was never fully informed. He felt little uprisings and rebellions would raise awareness. Then he called for the blood of patriots and tryants, but that's another discussion!
The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.